The CON-LAB voters’ split on which news outlets are most trusted – politicalbetting.com
The CON-LAB voters’ split on which news outlets are most trusted – politicalbetting.com
I have been very struck by this from YouGov on how backers of the Tories and LAB trust or distrust different news outlets.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I’d have them pretty much bottom, they pretty much only exist to promulgate bollocks.
ITV and the FT now the media of record? Times change.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/self-abuse/
Equally interesting is how it was received when I previously posted it. One of the “realist” posters referred to it as that “shitty poll”. Almost as if they didn’t like what it said.
They get curious opinion pieces and strange opera reviews.
Of course its credible that there are senior people who think the NHS isn't the best model and should be replaced with a privatised system, but the idea that anyone who thinks this would go about it by "running it down" in order to make people angry that it doesn't work doesn't make sense politically or financially. It's simply a conspiracy theory.
Secondly, it appears that Tories are on the whole less trusting of media on average than Labour voters.
Three, some of these sources (eg Reuters, excellent and trustworthy) are ones which very very few non anorak punters will ever use except indirectly.
Four, does anyone on the planet seriously use GBNews?
Five, the Tory score for C4News, which sometimes competes with the Pyongyang Daily Argus is remarkable.
Six, the outstanding Al Jazeera is missing.
But, yes, the omission of Al Jazeera is a shame. I know people, centrist, who swear by it for international coverage.
Conversely, the Telegraph was really good up until c. 4 years ago and is now laughable.
Their disaffection, bordering on bewilderment, would be almost worthy of sympathy were it not for the fact that they're so plain nasty.
Last time I saw this? 1992-7 but this is far worse. Another reason why Labour / LibDems will wipe the floor with them at the GE.
US influence on the UK is a constantly mixed blessing, but polarised media must be one of its most dangerous exports.
I read both. Journalistically the Telegraph used to be superb but it has plunged in the last two or three years. More or less coinciding with Charlie's Moore's obsession with 'The Blob'.
If you’re now reducing the strength of your claim to “some people believe in low tax and public spending as a matter of principle”, then you’re not really saying much.
I love the US surveys that show by far the most trusted news outlet is The Weather Channel. And it is indeed one of the US’s greatest media creations.
Early - Mid 2000s, as noted upthread.
However the quality notably declined. I actually liked it in the Frank Johnson era. It was delightfully counter-cultural amid increasing Blair hysteria.
Those Taiwanese have more balls than I thought.
Funnily enough the domestic BBC's most neutral period was during the EU referendum where they were legally obliged to stay neutral and watched things closely.
You are about to heavily shit over my betting position.
They were always going to fuck it up today.
Not sure what they mean by "trust" though. The old template of here are the facts and here is what we think about them died a long time ago. Everyone spins and you just have to be alert to that. Sometimes even people on here spin too, extraordinary though that may seem.
My Ukrainian irredentism is also more expansive than anyone else on the planet.
For example, the management practices of the 1950s create the industrial relations of the 1950s.
Yes I am aware of the conflict of interest.
He will forever be known as a tainted champion, that's all I need.
(1) do you have dangly bits between your legs?
(2) what pronoun would you prefer to be addressed as?
In fact it's all reasonably predictable. The BBC would have been way out front a year ago but thanks to cuts and a perceived takeover by BORIS JOHNSON'S Tory Party has put paid to that.
Boris Johnson really has poisoned everything he's touched. To see ITV more trusted than the BBC is a huge disappointment because for everything it does seen and unseen it's head and shoulders better
(fwiw my view is No)
I'm beginning to think that a few small bets on other Republicans might be a good idea.
I'll admit to being surprised by the FT, which I actually trust less than the BBC and The Times, and think The Star is unfairly scored - yes, it's trash but it's only there for a laugh.
Not entirely convinced about this eating Japanese knotweed business - not least because one wonders what happens to the trimmings. Not something for the compost heap.
And squirrel - what about pest baits?
But muntjac I have eaten, and will happily do so again ...
The only really fair way to do it would be to get 1,000+ demographically weighted people to read/watch them all over, say, a period of 6+ months and then re-run it but, of course, that's never going to happen.
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
@CinC_AFU
The time has come to take back what belongs to us.
https://twitter.com/cinc_afu/status/1662451731261796353
Nothing to do with us guv' said the BBC and that was the truth. As far as they were concerned the same rules applied to both sides and that was good enough. But of course the 'other side were the government and their reputation couldn't afford to take the liberties with 'truth' that their opponents could.
Last time, PP and PSOE both won 9 seats on the 27 seat A Coruna Council with the local Atlantic Tide losing four seats to 6. The Galician Nationalists won two and Citizens the other seat.
As this is PP national leader Nunez's home turf, you'd think he'd be expecting PP to take control of A Coruna .
Nationally, PP are 5-6 points ahead of Sanchez's PSOE and a PP-VOX coalition would have a wafer thin majority in the new Cortes.
I think the less familiar publications are clustering around the mean here, which is perfectly understandable- if you have a 1-10 scale and you don't know too much about it you'll probably go for "5".
I jest, since I think we all know some problems are not technological in nature and yet some silicon valley spod in a hoody and scruffy beard is probably raising a billion dollars for their new start up to try to implement a technological solution to that problem. But drawing a line just before smartphones and e-gates, but after high speed internet and other useful developments, seems somewhat arbitrary.